RutlandHerald.com - We Are Vermont

Candidate's essay prompts accusation of anti-Semitism



Toolbox

By DAVE GRAM The Associated Press - Published: October 31, 2008

MONTPELIER — An independent candidate for Vermont governor is being criticized as anti-Semitic for writing — in an essay for a state-published election guide — that "some Jews allegedly discriminate against disabled Vermonters."

Cris Ericson of Chester, who is running both for governor and for Vermont's seat in the U.S. House, made the comments for her entry in the Vermont Statewide Candidate Information Publication, a 40-page booklet being distributed this week by the Vermont secretary of state's office.

The booklet provides biographical information and issue positions of candidates for statewide office.

About 20,000 copies of it are being sent to town offices, to be made available to voters. About 73,700 copies are being distributed by four Vermont newspapers — The Burlington Free Press, The Newport Daily Express, The Rutland Herald and The Barre Montpelier Times Argus — as an insert.

"Some Jewish Doctors, Social Workers, Police and Housing Authority Administrators allegedly 'talk down' to Disabled People even though the Disabled Person may not have a mental disability, and may have cancer, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, or other permanent disease," Ericson wrote in her entry describing her candidacy for governor.

In a telephone interview, she complained of being excluded from debates. "Are any of the people, in charge of organizations holding candidate forums and debates, Jewish?" she wrote in the essay.

Ericson, an artist and musician, wouldn't say whether she had a disability that might cause her — under her theory — to be excluded from debates.

"I'm not going to answer a question like that," she said.

Asked about concerns that her remarks were anti-Semitic, Ericson said that while she was raised as a Christian Protestant, she had had a DNA test and learned that she had Jewish ancestry. "I feel that I have a right to scold my own kind," she said.

Her essay was labeled "outrageous" by Secretary of State Deb Markowitz, who is Jewish.

Before publishing the booklet, Markowitz sought an opinion from state Attorney General William Sorrell about whether the booklet could be edited and the comments removed.

In an Oct. 14 legal opinion, Assistant Attorney General Michael McShane said the free speech and press rights provisions of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution — and the law under which the Legislature authorized the secretary of state to publish the booklet — barred Markowitz from editing the material.

"We understand that the First Amendment and a lack of legislative standards is likely to result in the publication of material that is clearly offensive to many and perhaps to the great majority of citizens," McShane wrote. "However, the government's ability to regulate the content of political speech is severely limited."

Markowitz reluctantly agreed that she was required to publish the comments.

"I trust that when voters read the publication, they will take it for what it's worth, which is obviously an irrational charge from a candidate," she said.

Janet Dermody, deputy director of the Vermont Center for Independent Living, which advocates for people with disabilities, said she was disturbed by the sentiments Ericson expressed.

She said some people do show prejudice against disabled citizens, but, "It has nothing to do with their religion. It has nothing to do with their color or their country of origin.

"Disability strikes every group, and in every group we find people who can't do the right thing by people with disabilities because they don't know how," Dermody said. "But that's everybody. There's no special corner on that market."

Ericson included in her essay a passage from Chapter 21 of Leviticus, a book in the Old Testament of the Bible, which appears to bar people with disabilities — the list includes "he who is blind or lame, or who has any disfigurement or malformation" — from participating in religious services.

"Jews have no right to impose their religious Law of discrimination against Disabled People when they receive state or federal funding for Police, Housing Authority, Medicaid, Medicare, and organizations holding candidate debates and forums," Ericson wrote.

But Rabbi Joshua Chasan, of Burlington's Ohavi Zedek Synagogue, said that teaching from Leviticus — along with many others from ancient Hebrew Scripture — had been discarded long ago. Jewish doctrine of recent centuries "doesn't involve animal sacrifices, which are at the core of the religion of ancient Israel," the rabbi said.

As for the disabled, or members of any other minority group, Chasan said Jewish teaching is "affirming of all people, each of whom is created in the image of God," and emphasizes "the equality and uniqueness of every human being."

He took issue with the state's decision to publish Ericson's essay.

"I think that this statement is beyond the pale of community standards of speech," he said. "I think she has a right to say this, but I think the government of the state of Vermont has the responsibility to edit it out. Are they going to publish the campaign platforms of Nazis?"

But he also said such comments should be exposed so people can see anti-Semitism still exists.

"One may think that a single statement from a candidate who is not going to get very many votes is harmless," Chasan said. "It is a mistake to ignore this kind of language. Like a physical virus, anti-Semitism grows quietly and malignantly beneath, without our ability to track it."








READER COMMENTS


Hey, what do you expect from a stoner? She's so far out there she may never get back even if she gets some treatment. And you people who defend this outrageous behavior on the part of an addict are guilty of promoting her sickness.
-- Posted by Notta Bushman on Sat, Nov 1, 2008, 9:51 pm EST

report this comment



Cris Ericson is as crazy as a shiethouse rat. End of story.
-- Posted by Vermontis on Sat, Nov 1, 2008, 5:15 am EST

report this comment



Old Jarhead is Anti-Obama.
Old Jarhead claims Obama is an Arab Muslim,
though this notion is patently false.
Arabs are a Semitic people.
Ergo, Old Jarhead is an Anti-Semite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic
Old Jarhead is so mean he has a Jamie Farr dartboard,
won't listen to Casey Kasem's popular music countdown radio show,
and puts no stock whatsoever in a Zogby poll.
-- Posted by Christian Essene on Sat, Nov 1, 2008, 12:54 am EST

report this comment



I do not see where here comments or any comment about a JEW can be considered Racist, are you all jumping the gun abit? People from Isreal are Israelies or Israelites and Jew is short for Jewish which is a RELIGION or FAITH and is NOT a Race of people, so how even in the remote sense can be considered RACIST? As far as a HATE Speech, I don't think so, it is NOT HATE to state an opinion that does not suggest bodily harm or assault. She very well may have a point and wouldn't the people she refers to be HATEFUL by not seeing a Handicap person?? Anytime someone disagrees with a Jew, it could be considered ANTI-Semitic, a perfect example is that Catholics do not accept Jewish Holidays nor do they recognize their beliefs, so they are ANTI-SEMITIC.. Being ANTI anything is not bad so why do people think one can be procescuted for being ANTI anything? I am Anti Abortion, Anti Drugs, Anti OSSAMABA, etc.
I think people read way to much into stuff and draw silly notions that do not exist just so they have something to grandstand about.. It seems everyone wants to grandstand and she very well might be as well. I most certainly do not think for a minute she is promoting anything, other than her own opinion and I think that is protected under the First as much as BURNING THE FLAG is. Chill out people and regroup, I think you all are finding fault just for the sake of it, just don't listen to her or vote for her. It isn't like she is promoting a Nazi Party or a KKK Meeting, I don't think her comment would even come close to that.
-- Posted by Old Jarhead on Fri, Oct 31, 2008, 4:42 pm EST

report this comment



The State of Vermont is not endorsing or "promoting" Ms. Ericson's comments by publishing them. Instead, the State is informing the electorate of the candidate's views. That is a very valuable service, and its purpose would be defeated if her comments were omitted.

Those who oppose her opinions should be grateful that the public knows what she thinks. They would have been protecting her by censoring her.

And those who would censor her should give the public a little credit. Don't they think we have the intelligence to see these comments as what they are?

The value of the free speech provision in the First Amendment is twofold. It not only protects the right of a person to express herself (and if this protection applies to popular opinions, it must apply to unpopular opinions as well), it also promotes the right of everyone else to be informed. Let us judge for ourselves the value of the individual's speech, rather than trying to protect us from it.
-- Posted by Just Me on Fri, Oct 31, 2008, 10:35 am EST

report this comment



HISTORY OF ATTITUDE OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST DISABLED PEOPLE

We studied the history of slavery before coming to
the decision to give Blacks the right to vote.

We need to study the history of the attitutde of discrimination
against disabled people.

Is the Old Testament Bible,
Leviticus, Chapter 21,
"Hate Speech Against DISABLED people?"

Leviticus, Chapter 21
The Lord said to Moses, "Speak to Aaron and tell him: None of
your descendants, of whatever generation, who has any
defect shall come forward to offer up the food of his God.
Therefore, he who has any of the following
defects may not come forward: he who is blind, or lame,
or who has any disfigurement or malformation,
or a crippled foot or hand, or who is humpbacked
or weakly or walleyed, or who is afflicted with eczema,
ringworm or hernia. No descendant of Aaron the
priest who has any such defect may draw near to offer
up the oblations of
the Lord; on account of his defect he may not draw
near to offer up the food of his God."

Secretary of State Deborah Markowitz has joined a
COALITION to promote three candidates for Governor
while excluding four candidates for Governor at
http://mysoapbox.vpt.org
She is clearly discriminating against candidate
Tony O'Connor who is missing an arm.

The COALITION members are listed as
AARP
League of Women Voters
University of Vermont
Coporation for Public Broadcasting
Office of the Secretary of State of Vermont
Vermont Public Television
mysourcefor.org

Isn't it an illegal act of exceeding her authority
for Secretary of State Deborah Markowitz
to join a COALITION to promote
3 candidates for Governor while
excluding 4 candidates for Governor?
-- Posted by Cris Ericson on Fri, Oct 31, 2008, 10:34 am EST

report this comment



Say What? I guess a set of ethical standards does really come to bite you in the a.. eventually. I would assume that most states, of course, why have any standards in Vermont, deal with this simply by clear ethical standards that would deny publically paid for publications that promote racism or hate speech.
-- Posted by Justn Thyme on Fri, Oct 31, 2008, 6:25 am EST

report this comment


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout